ICMP is not guaranteed way to test connection over internet - many routers have ICMP limit, which causes the packet to be droppedCheck with mtr and there will be no losses on the last hop

Good point. Sorry about making an unfair assumption. Regardless, I'd still like to check the reliability of my connection to stratum.mining.cz. I tried running mtr stratum.bitcoin.cz a couple of times, and it seems to resolve to different addresses each time. Looks to me like some load balancing of some sort is going on, but it seems odd to me that it wouldn't just resolve to the closest geographical server to me every time. Sometimes it's smeu01.bitcoin.cz, sometimes it's 192.198.107.178, and sometimes it's 54.225.68.97 (ec2-54-225-68-97.compute-1.amazonaws.com).

Do you think manually specifying 54.225.68.97:3333 in my miner would be a good idea? 54.225.68.97 seems to have the lowest latency for me.

The main reason to use load balancing is to distribute the load and failover to the remaining live servers in case of problems, which you will loose in this case.Lowest latency does not mean 'best' ... what if the server is close but overloaded?

If you insist on fixed IP - it's recommended to at least add the hostname for failover

ICMP is not guaranteed way to test connection over internet - many routers have ICMP limit, which causes the packet to be droppedCheck with mtr and there will be no losses on the last hop

Good point. Sorry about making an unfair assumption. Regardless, I'd still like to check the reliability of my connection to stratum.mining.cz. I tried running mtr stratum.bitcoin.cz a couple of times, and it seems to resolve to different addresses each time. Looks to me like some load balancing of some sort is going on, but it seems odd to me that it wouldn't just resolve to the closest geographical server to me every time. Sometimes it's smeu01.bitcoin.cz, sometimes it's 192.198.107.178, and sometimes it's 54.225.68.97 (ec2-54-225-68-97.compute-1.amazonaws.com).

Do you think manually specifying 54.225.68.97:3333 in my miner would be a good idea? 54.225.68.97 seems to have the lowest latency for me.

If it works yes,

but keep in mind tomorrow something else may be better.

No connection is perfect.

Yep, it works. I can successfully submit shares using all three of those addresses.

The main reason to use load balancing is to distribute the load and failover to the remaining live servers in case of problems, which you will loose in this case.Lowest latency does not mean 'best' ... what if the server is close but overloaded?

If you insist on fixed IP - it's recommended to at least add the hostname for failover

Of course I'll still have stratum.bitcoin.cz as a failover pool specified in the miner since that's the supported address. I'm just trying to outsmart the load-balancer to get the best connection.

However, if I'm reading the output from mtr right, there is actually some loss at the last hop. More so for 54.225.68.97 than the other two. Maybe smeu01.bitcoin.cz is actually the best address for me even if it has the highest latency?

EDIT: Yeah, I realize this isn't a solution if the server is overloaded... But you said there shouldn't be any loss at the last hop?

For me all 3 hosts are perfect, so it's not the last hop being a problem for you, but the route it takes.

It seems (from my side) core.servermania.com has some rate limit rules, so those 0.8% may be false alarm for you, but not sure

With Amazon it also depends on their load balancer(s), which may be lagged from time to time when a new server joins or leaves, but the great thing with stratum is that it keeps the TCP connection (chached and) open and there is no need to find a new route until there is a problem.

smeu is a bit far from you, so putting it last, but in fact all 3 are OK on my opinion

I just came here from the pool page. I had unconfirmed shares earlier, but that's now 0 on the "My account" page, with the confirmed being the same amount it was last night. I've got 500 GH/s going in, and nothing shows? There was 0.03+, or more, unconfirmed; now 0.0000000 ? I hope this gets fixed, and I get back what was already there pending confirmation a few hours ago....

I just came here from the pool page. I had unconfirmed shares earlier, but that's now 0 on the "My account" page, with the confirmed being the same amount it was last night. I've got 500 GH/s going in, and nothing shows? There was 0.03+, or more, unconfirmed; now 0.0000000 ? I hope this gets fixed, and I get back what was already there pending confirmation a few hours ago....

Well after reading a lot more on this thread and a lot on other sites about their pools I've come to a conclusion that may not be a ground breaker for many but it is a conclusion anyway. It is very obvious there are and will always be those on or in any pool who wish to complain and become very upset with the pool. Every forum has these people complaining over and over how unfair the pool is and feel something is very wrong.

Ok, fair enough that's their opinion and we all have a right to our opinion. BUT, what I DON'T UNDERSTAND is if they are so dang unhappy about a pool - why don't they just leave it and stop causing problems and issues for those who are happy with the pool! It seems all pools are full of these people.

BETTER YET, why don,t they start their own pools if they think they have a better way? Why? Because they can't, they don't know how to even begin or the money to start so they just stay and complain.

Life is to short everyone - just enjoy and be happy that Slush pool is here for those of us to use who aren't smart enough to do it ourselves. Man I've learned so much in the past week I can't believe it and I WILL BE STAYING WITH SLUSH POOL for the duration because this pool seems fair and the other pools are no better if you read forums on them.

Like has been mention several times do some research then make your own decisions and just enjoy making what bitcoins you can - it's FUN.

Oh and this post has nothing to do with the above post on pings. I do think it is cool how they can take pictures of their computers and post them. Oh wait I just had a thought, am I considered as being a forum troll (if that is the right word) if so I will stop posting.

....and when something really is wrong? Just shut up? Be happy? Maybe the concerns voiced push action to fix problems. They do no harm, in fact the discussions here explaining why most apparent problems happen are how new people pick up knowledge from old hands sometimes.

Has anyone elese noticed the estimated reward for the current round is dropping like your mining has stopped? Estimated reward is now down to 0.00004556 BTC

Normally I get 0.00030000 BTC or somewhere in that region. the last 2 or 3 rounds show a slightly lower reward than normal but I neglected that as natural fluctuation but only just noticed my estimated reward for this round is dropping by the minute the same as it does when I stop mining, yet all my workers still show last hsare as 0 minutes ago and I can't find any problems with their speed etc

Edit - It seems to be going back up now, anyone know why this might have happened?

Most of the popular miners (bfgminer, cgminer) will work fine directly with common stratum running pools. Are you sure that you need this proxy for your specific devices?

I understand, they do. But I have about 70 miners running right now. I want to use a proxy, so that I easily can move all the miners with 1 or 2 proxy's

Yes, that make sense. Using about 45 minters here, arranged into 4 instances of bfgminer/cgminer, without the need for a proxy. I read that some miners such as Blades which have only a LAN interface are best used with a proxy, but have no direct experience with Slush's proxy s/w.Good luck.

Most of the popular miners (bfgminer, cgminer) will work fine directly with common stratum running pools. Are you sure that you need this proxy for your specific devices?

I understand, they do. But I have about 70 miners running right now. I want to use a proxy, so that I easily can move all the miners with 1 or 2 proxy's

Yes, that make sense. Using about 45 minters here, arranged into 4 instances of bfgminer/cgminer, without the need for a proxy. I read that some miners such as Blades which have only a LAN interface are best used with a proxy, but have no direct experience with Slush's proxy s/w.Good luck.

by default, the stratum proxy points at Slush's pool. you have to recompile it or something to make it point at other pools. If you have done that, try looking for typos.

Has anyone elese noticed the estimated reward for the current round is dropping like your mining has stopped? Estimated reward is now down to 0.00004556 BTC

Normally I get 0.00030000 BTC or somewhere in that region. the last 2 or 3 rounds show a slightly lower reward than normal but I neglected that as natural fluctuation but only just noticed my estimated reward for this round is dropping by the minute the same as it does when I stop mining, yet all my workers still show last hsare as 0 minutes ago and I can't find any problems with their speed etc

Edit - It seems to be going back up now, anyone know why this might have happened?

There was an increase in pool hash rate to the vicinity of 680 TH, which would reduce the individual miners' share, then there was a drop which increased the individual shares. Now the overall pool hash rate is slowly rising again.... on average our total reward should roughly the same (greater total hash rate = more frequent blocks with smaller individual rewards).

Most of the popular miners (bfgminer, cgminer) will work fine directly with common stratum running pools. Are you sure that you need this proxy for your specific devices?

I understand, they do. But I have about 70 miners running right now. I want to use a proxy, so that I easily can move all the miners with 1 or 2 proxy's

Yes, that make sense. Using about 45 minters here, arranged into 4 instances of bfgminer/cgminer, without the need for a proxy. I read that some miners such as Blades which have only a LAN interface are best used with a proxy, but have no direct experience with Slush's proxy s/w.Good luck.

How do you mean 4 instances? Did you connected your miners to each other?